I wish more people would understand that net neutrality in it's platonic ideal will be nothing like the net neutrality that meanders through the bowels of the government sausage factory.
VPNs are already usable by any motivated main-stream desktop user, and point-to-point + next-gen wifi allowing ad-hoc fast networks are only a matter of time.
At best the telcos will be able to squeeze unreasonable rent out of their infrastructure with outrageous data-caps and surcharges, but the writing on the wall even for that.. municipalities are laying their own fiber, and google fiber is likely only going to keep growing.
Just like no amount of raids, laws, scare tactics, pr campaigns, etc were never able to put even a dent in media pirating: an effectively free an open internet is going to be accessible by motivated individuals, period.
I believe most citizens (myself included) live and act with the intent to obey the law. So while a free and open internet may be technically feasible for any individual, if the access techniques are actually illegal, citizens who wish to obey the law will lose access. The law still very much matters, even if it is hard to enforce and easy to circumvent.
Besides, unless I am mistaken (I don't follow it that closely) there is not any whisperings of making things like VPNs or adhoc networks illegal. It is primarily about the "right" of the telcos to favor certain traffic, by increased speed or traffic not counting toward your quota for some sites/services.
This makes no sense. An ISP could block VPN traffic... and there are millions of people with access to only a single ISP.
I guess if "motivated individuals" means they have to uproot their lives and move to another part of the country to get a decent ISP.. then sure, I agree. I guess we all have plenty of choices then.
How? They could block access to a specific IP, which might be a VPN server, but they have no way of differentiating encrypted vpn traffic from encrypted anything traffic.